I haven't encountered ANYTHING like you are seeing in this photo, Nor have I had any trouble using several different HDR tools. EV3 -EV2 -EV1 Normal metering +EV1 +EV2 +EV3
#PHOTOMATIX PRO 5.1.3 CAMERA SERIES#
So on a 7 shot series of photos using an Exposure variance of EV1, the photos would look like this:
I then tell the camera to vary the exposure by either 1 or 2 EV. I normally shoot 3 or 5 exposures (occasionally 7, if I am uncertain of my exposure), making sure that at least one of them is the "normal" shot, that the camera itself decides is proper (Exposing for the most important feature I want to see clearly). I don't know, I shoot with a mirrorless camera. Is mirror lock up essential in live mode to avoid shake? My Camera is Canon T2i / 550D.I don't know what is going on, but I still think there is something 'wrong' with your 11 source photos I did not find that to be the case when I adjusted the photo in ACDSee Ultimate 9. Did you try "Exposure Fusion"? I've found that methodology helps minimize that tone-mapped look. I took the liberty of downloading the JPG and it wasn't until I brightened the photo that I could see that you have some tone-mapping going on. So are you saying the shadows had the same level of tonality in all 11 photos? Is it ok to combine even no of exposures in a HDR? (Such as 4,6,8,10 instead of 3,5,7,9,11)?.I used Tripod, Live view (No mirrolockup). I started from Highlights and Shot 1 stop apart until my shadows came into mid tone area. Still the shadows are dark even with sliders are pushed to the maximum until artifacts shows up.Īlso, can you describe your shooting technique?Įxposures were taken at the time of golden hour (Evening). To my eyes, it looks as if the shadows are too dark, and extremely muddy.Įven though i have made sure that my shadows are in mid area. Btw do you like the picture? I mean as an HDR? May be I'm looking more natural than this. I made sure that my shadows came in to mid tone area.Ĭan you describe exactly what you don't like about the photo you included? I have covered the whole dynamic range with each 1 stop different. What do you mean by not properly exposed. It's almost as it none of the photos in your sequence were properly exposed. It looks like the composite image is poorly exposed. Of the others, once I started using Oloneo I never went back to Photomatix, Oloneo has wonderful batch processing facilities and overall I would rank it as my second go to tool after LR photo merge. Been using Photomatix, Nik HDR Effex and Oloneo for years. Yes, we Sony sensor people do it every day with the Develop panel in ACR/LR. That being said, it is my personal belief that a good single raw image can be processed to a near HDR like (natural) image. If on the other hand good taste prevails, if one already has ACR CC with exposure blend, I can see no reason to purchase Photomatix, as ACR does a better job at the natural look.
You post implies that Photomatix is ONLY good for that tonemapped look.īut PN is very adept at both tone mapping and fusion type HDR which can result in extremely natural looking HDR photos.īottom line, if one wants the Trey Ratcliff look, Photomatix will get it for you: But it isn't always the right tool for the job. I'm glad I have Photomatix, it's a first class product, probably the best HDR utility on the market. You guys might be interested in an article I wrote for my personal blog:
But PN is very adept at both tone mapping and fusion type HDR which can result in extremely natural looking HDR photos. You post implies that Photomatix is ONLY good for that tonemapped look. Haven't used Photomatix since CC, but there's personal taste involved for sure.
#PHOTOMATIX PRO 5.1.3 CAMERA FULL#
ACR does a really excellent, natural looking exposure blend with full DNG adjustments available after the blend. Photomatix also does a good exposure blend. If you're after the Kandy Kolor tonemapped look, Photomatix is your man, ACR will not do it.